Do we really still believe that fewer, more expensive and complex planes is the best path forward?

They're likely to remain useful in some contexts for quite some time.

A few really good planes and a lot of low-end drones is probably what we'll have in a few decades.

In particular the F-47 is expected to act as a forward control node for drones. We're probably decades away from having AI software that can autonomously execute any type of complex mission. So that means there's a critical need for a crewed aircraft survivable enough to get close to the target, even if it doesn't have to directly employ weapons itself.

The USAF requires a very high-end fighter with a range of several thousand nautical miles (or at least double that of the F-22) in order to operate within the area denial bubble of China, which they project is only going to get more and more capable.

https://www.twz.com/air/air-force-predicts-enemy-anti-air-mi...

Thats interesting - am I understanding correctly that the reasoning is that forward air bases will become more vulnerable, so we need to be able to operate from domestic bases?

Let's hope it goes a little better than Starliner.

Doesn't exactly make me bullish on the future that we're pinning our air superiority hopes on Boeing...

I guess DoD can't give lockmart monopoly over stealth fighters. That said, IIRC Boeing's never designed a stealth plane before. But can't let Boeing military sink. LM gets F35s, NG gets B21s, Boeing gets NGAD.

Looking forward to 20 years of growing pain articles.

Can we finish the F-35 before we start another trillion dollar boondoggle? Especially with Boeing.

The F-35 has been operational for years, and has already been in combat. How is it not "finished"?

Yes it's achieved an Initial Operational Capacity, at least for the earlier versions. However, it hasn't finished Operational Testing, for the newer versions of software/hardware upgrades.

"The Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation said in its annual report, submitted to Congress on Jan. 31, that dedicated operational tests for the F-35’s Technology Refresh 3, or TR-3, upgrades will probably start in mid to late fiscal 2026, or around next summer. Those tests are intended to determine whether TR-3 is operationally effective.

Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt, the military’s F-35 program executive officer, said in a statement to Defense News that as of January, Lockheed Martin has delivered more than 100 TR-3 equipped fighters. All of those jets have software allowing its pilots to conduct training flights, including combat training."

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2025/02/05/key-tests-for-lat...

> Yes it's achieved an Initial Operational Capacity, at least for the earlier versions. However, it hasn't finished Operational Testing, for the newer versions of software/hardware upgrades.

Yeah, by that standard, we’ve jumped the gun on the B-21 (and the B-2 and the B-1 and...) because the B-52 isn't “finished”, with B-52J Initial Operational Capacity now expected in 2033.

Well now that's moving the goalposts. Military aircraft are frequently upgraded with new models or blocks throughout the production run. So there will always be new capabilities undergoing testing. The F-35 TR-3 is behind schedule and over budget as usual, but that really has nothing to do with the NGAD / F-47 program.

Only 30% of F-35 fleet are "mission ready", software suite is full of bugs, and the airframe cracks if you use the cannon, but sure, it's just "moving the goal posts" and has nothing to do with anything. Let's spend another couple trillion on another half-baked heap of bugs, except this time around let's spend it with the company that forgot how to build reliable planes or spacecraft.

It's not like there's any alternative. We need the capabilities and there are no other comparable aircraft in production, so despite its flaws it's the F-35 or nothing. Meanwhile the F-22 airframes are wearing out, and it's too small to be fully effective in the Indo-Pacific theater, so the F-47 is needed as well. There's plenty of blame to go around for the current deplorable state of readiness but it is what it is.

And let's not have any silly claims that those manned fighters could be completely replaced by cheaper drones. Maybe that will be possible someday but for now AI software is nowhere near ready to take on the full mission set.

DOGE hard at work making efficiency and shit… :)

Lovely. We're stuck between Lockheed, who brought us the wonderful F-35 budget black hole, and Boeing, who can't seem to make anything airworthy these days in commercial and spaceflight.

What happened to aviation? The US used to be so incredibly good at it, at least ostensibly.

It got financialized. Everything has.

F47 for 47th president? What a sales pitch.

Allegedly it's been undergoing test flights for 5 years, back when Trump was the 45th president. I think we can dispense with the notion that the number refers to Trump.

I think you're mixing up the R&D X-planes (there are lots: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_X-planes) with the actual aircraft, which isn't gonna have its first flight for years.

USAF plane naming is... odd. F-35, F-117, B-1/B-2/B-21. Not much rhyme or reason. It's very possible 47 was picked for Trump's benefit. Silly, but possible.

Looks like catch up to China: "China’s J-36 Stealth Fighter Prototype Makes Second Public Appearance" - https://www.eurasiantimes.com/chinas-j-36-6th-gen-fighter-pr...

Hard to get excited about a crumbling empire telling me they've taken on a badass project and tasked a company like Boeing to make it badass.

I was working in a dept full of very talented engineers at Cisco in '19. One of the engineers got a bit fed-up with things and took a new position at Boeing. He returned a month later. Take that however you want.